The trouble with men

Spectator ^ | Issue: 15 October 2005 | Molly Watson

[usurper]

I agree that what you are saying is true in a lot of situations but remember it takes two to tango and I do know of one situation where a woman I know dated a guy for ten years and guess what no ring. So what does that tell you?

That he is a lucky guy. Of course, depending on the state he could still be nailed with a palimony suit.

[SoothingDave]

Preach it! I'd add that there are many women out there who don't grow up, too. They're permanent stuck in adolescence because their parents spoiled them rotten rather than put up with their 13-yo temper tantrums. The Peter Pan syndrome applies to both sexes.

Remember, we've seen articles on here before about Brits and how they would rather hang out with the boys in the pub than go on "dates." And since the girls are giving them the sex for free anyway, who can blame them? Add in birth control and abortion to clean up any "accidents" and is it any wonder it's difficult to find Brits who want to carry on the civilization?

But don't worry. I'm sure the Muslims in Britain are reproducing.

SD

[freeeee]

we can attribute that and give thanks to FEMINISM for that cancer on society.

The thing that really gets me is that feminism was supposedly created to counter the dominance of one sex over another.

Yet that's precisely what I see in these marriages: domination. Only now the shoe is on the other foot.

How ironic. And hypocritical.

When called on this, these women will explode with anger. They'll obtusely attack the messenger, and proclaim their dogma to be unquestionable, even in the face of clear contrary evidence. The answer to men running from them is to blame the men, because someone has to take the blame for their situation, and it sure as hell isn't going to be themselves.

But the world itself is not changed by their tantrum. They can't change the fact that for every action there is a reaction. They can't change the behavior of the "marriage market", for lack of a better term. They can't scream or belittle the backlash of boycott against marriage (pun intended), and they can't get a judge to make someone offer them a ring (yet).

So they get mad (hey, that's what worked up 'til now!) and write angry snarky articles, one of which being the article at the top of this thread.

[DA740]

The answer to the female cacophony, and all the destruction that goes with it, is for men to stop listening, put Sheila back in the box, take control back and clean up the mess.

DA740

[miliantnutcase]

My wife is a Democrat... Although oddly enough she is probably more right wing than I am. Which is one of the reasons why I love her. Lol she's pro-gun, pro-life, pro-military, pro-capital punishment etc. Yet she and her family is infatuated with Klinton.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

" The answer to men running from them is to blame the men " and also as it was stated in this article by this MAN HATING WOMAN, she blames men for not wanting to commit to a relationship and marriage, and calls those men as " INMATURE ".
I think, it is on the contrary.
Those men are wise, and do not want to get stuck with a feminist oriented, domineering, selfish, self centered, iron rule under the thumb inmature ruling woman

[Prophet in the wilderness]

You have to have her listen to RUSH to break the curse, and trance that the Clinton's have put over her.

[freeeee]

Realistically, men can't just take control of the whole process. Women vote, and any politician wanting to make things equal in divorce court isn't going to get or stay elected. There's major money and vested interests at stake here, and that will get out the feminist vote.

So the "marriage market" reacts as any market would to government regulation: a boycott.

Just as minimum wage laws create unemployment,
Just as rent control creates houseing shortages,
So does inequality in marriage and relationships create spinsters and perpetual bachelors.

It doesn't matter how much control women have over the process. Just like the communists couldn't control economies with guns, women cannot control relationships with judges.

And now they're beginning to find out why.

[grellis]

Asian chestnuts--definitely NOT fit for human consumption. Keeps the damn squirrels out of my bird feeders, though. We picked up a couple hundred in less than 15 minutes! It is beautiful out today.

[HitmanLV]

Don't forget that a man who goes into a romance fearful of losing his nest egg will likely be recognized as a weak, inferior, and fearful male. Women tend to reject them.

That's not a boycott, exactly.

[freeeee]

You're right. An immature man will only see the immediate benefit of marriage to these women. Mr. Jeeves most eloquently describes this in his post #60:

Too many men will put up with any amount of verbal abuse and power trips from a woman they find physically attractive - will even marry her, knowing what kind of personality she has.

A mature man won't do that. He thinks with the big head instead of the little one. He'll hold out. He'll put his long term happiness ahead of the expediency of keeping an attractive but shrill woman who demands a ring - or else.

I would like to reiterate that I don't think all women are like this. Oh, the fine gems that defy this insanity are priceless. But too many are, and my friends have married some of them.

[freeeee]

Don't forget that a man who goes into a romance fearful of losing his nest egg will likely be recognized as a weak, inferior, and fearful male.

I recognize that they don't respect weakness. Unfortunately, a marriage license today incurs weakness no matter how the man behaves.

The moment that contract is signed, she can come home, kick him in the b_____, s___ in the sink three times a day and there won't be a damned thing he can do about it, and she knows it, and she knows he knows it.

If he cowers, she'll eventually become contempful of her newly created doormat.

If he stands up, she's assumes victim status, files for divorce and takes everything he has.

Others see this time and again. Then they stop signing marriage licenses. Today's strong sane man won't sign, he won't take s___, and he'll tell her to hit the road if she pulls these antics.

And them Molly Watson writes mean things about him.

[HitmanLV]

I really don't think that's the case.

[Nick Danger]

Feminism is the ultimate proof that we should be careful what we wish for, because we might get it.

Ol' Molly here wanted a career and to be financially independent. And she is! Good on her, then.

[freeeee]

Hi Nick. I've been a long time fan of your posts here.

[Eurotwit]

Sorry for intruding......

American women scare the life out of me.....

That's probably why I have never been succesful with them :-)

Cheers.

[HitmanLV]

Haha! No intrusion. Just don't be afraid of them. They will like you more for it, not less.

[Nick Danger]

Just don't be afraid of them. They will like you more for it, not less.

That's what scares him.

[HitmanLV]

Indeed. That scares a lot of men.

[libstripper]

It's absolutely astounding how exactly the same thing can be written in entirely different language several millenia apart and still be true.